Navigate:

GOP softens anti-tax rhetoric

Bob Corker said he'd accept a 10:1 ratio of cuts to revenue increases. | John Shinkle/POLITICO

Of course, there is no deal yet, and Republicans could well reject any proposal calling for higher taxes once it materializes. But with the national debt poised to top $16 trillion, Bush tax rates set to expire and $1.2 trillion in automatic spending cuts poised to take effect in 2013, many on the Hill believe that a major deal can’t be reached without GOP give on taxes.

The party signaled as much during supercommittee negotiations last year, in a proposal floated by Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), who sought to pair a revenue increase with a permanent extension of the Bush tax cuts. And last June, led by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), 34 Senate Republicans voted to end a $6 billion tax break for ethanol producers.

Text Size

-

+

reset

On top of that, if Romney becomes president, one of his first actions could be to raise the debt ceiling. That is bound to trigger a messy feud — or a historic deal — after House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) renewed demands recently for spending cuts to offset any increase in the borrowing limit.

“He’s facing the prospect of being president of the United States in a country with an intolerable debt, and the first thing he’s going to have to do is to ask the Congress to raise the debt limit,” said Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), who is willing to entertain higher revenues coupled with entitlement reforms. “He’s going to have sit down with a Congress that’s going to be fairly evenly split between Democrats and Republicans and come to a result. That’s his job as president.”

Romney said in November he wouldn’t endorse “any plan” that raises revenues. He also said new taxes aren’t the “right answer” to balancing the budget. And during a Fox News debate in August, Romney and his presidential rivals all raised their hands when asked whether they would walk away from a deficit-cutting plan that raises $1 in taxes for every $10 in spending cuts.

Readers' Comments (113)

Any time you hear a Republican refer to broadening the base that is a tax increase on people not paying taxes now to reduce the amount of taxes being paid by the upper earners. The Repubilcans try to pretend that the Bushy Boy tax cuts were for all NOT TRUE people on the bottom of the tax bracket saw their taxes increase while those on the top saw a decrease. DON"T BE FOOLED by the Republican smoke and mirrors. The lie about everything to enrich the wealthy at everybody elses expense.

Any time you hear a Republican refer to broadening the base that is a tax increase on people not paying taxes now to reduce the amount of taxes being paid by the upper earners. The Repubilcans try to pretend that the Bushy Boy tax cuts were for all NOT TRUE people on the bottom of the tax bracket saw their taxes increase while those on the top saw a decrease. DON"T BE FOOLED by the Republican smoke and mirrors. The lie about everything to enrich the wealthy at everybody elses expense.

Message to Romney: It doesn’t matter what you do you are going to win hands-down. Between Obama's social missteps and his total lack of will to rein in banks and to get Congress to work with him, Romney is getting in. Even though i was not a Romney fan I AM NOW. As President I think there is a higher standard at least when it comes to morality, and the fact is, that when the American people are sick being forced to accept certain things. What maryland did tonight was stella, they have figured out how to protect marriage they have put it on the ballot, and you know what happens to samesex/homosexual/gay marriage when the people decide, check this out

Any time you hear a Republican refer to broadening the base that is a tax increase on people not paying taxes now to reduce the amount of taxes being paid by the upper earners. The Repubilcans try to pretend that the Bushy Boy tax cuts were for all NOT TRUE people on the bottom of the tax bracket saw their taxes increase while those on the top saw a decrease. DON"T BE FOOLED by the Republican smoke and mirrors. The lie about everything to enrich the wealthy at everybody elses expense.

YAWN.............

President Zero took record amounts of money from Wall Street, every level of his Administration looks like a Goldman Sach's Executive Party, he was raised by a BANK VICE PRESIDENT, fer Christ's sake, and banks are now enjoying RECORD profits, while consummers are complaining about all the new fees since he passed his "Bank Reform Act."

Ask your LOCAL banker how they're doing..........

Not well, I'm afraid.............

The laws were written by this President to enrich THE MAJOR BANKS.

The hometown banks?

Well, despite them being the ones who might actually HELP the guy in the community, they're struggling, thanks to Obama trying to regulate them out of business for his buds.

Doubt that?

Stop in your local bank, and ask them........

They'll set you straight REAL fast about President Poodle Strudel...........

He's ALL ABOUT "The 1%ers."

All he has to do is call them "Fat Cats" before he takes their money. and you clowns will actually BELIEVE him!

An increase of about 10.6% from 2008, because of the recession/depression and aging demographics

and changes to welfare programs. I wish you would not be so deliberately misleading.

In the four year period CBO highlighted, the number of Americans on food stamps increased by 70 percent — “Nearly 45 million recipients, one out of every seven U.S. residents, received SNAP benefits in an average month in fiscal year 2011,” CBO explained.

CBO blamed three factors for the program’s expansion. They attribute 65 percent of the growth to a weak economy, 20 percent to temporarily higher benefit amounts resulting from Obama’s 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, and 15 percent on other factors such as food prices.

Nothing more sad than comments by 'takers' who rant about people who worked hard and are now making money. Perhaps you liberal "takers" should have actually studied, worked at being successful instead of smokin dope, and now crying about your plight. You reap what you sow. Cry baby.

Forget raising taxes,... it won't work. The numbers say even if you took all the income (100%) from these 'rich people' the amount would not fund the government for more than a few weeks. We spend too much. We have to eliminate waste and fraud in the programs we should have, get rid of the stupid programs that are nothing more than political, union feeding dipping ponds, and set a flat tax of 10% on all intial earnings over $25K, with NO DEDUCTIONS AND NO EXCEPTIONS. That eliminates the IRS (unless your too dumb to move a decimal point the right number of places) which is the worst agency when it comes to government dictatorship like process.

If we managed the money in our households like the government manages theirs, we would all be living on the street. Get rid if these politicians making themselves rich. Minimun wage for all elected officials. Board them in dormatories and put them on medicare. Make them drive or walk to work and fund their own trips back and forth. Dems and Repubs are all scum. We need to start over with the constitution as the base.

An increase of about 10.6% from 2008, because of the recession/depression and aging demographics

and changes to welfare programs. I wish you would not be so deliberately misleading.

In the four year period CBO highlighted, the number of Americans on food stamps increased by 70 percent — “Nearly 45 million recipients, one out of every seven U.S. residents, received SNAP benefits in an average month in fiscal year 2011,” CBO explained.

CBO blamed three factors for the program’s expansion. They attribute 65 percent of the growth to a weak economy, 20 percent to temporarily higher benefit amounts resulting from Obama’s 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, and 15 percent on other factors such as food prices.

You understand your %s are just for the increase in SNAP

20% of that increase due to a temporary change in program

A far smaller % for the impact on overall people receiving benefits

In other words,

People receiving benefits went from 44.5% to 49.1% since 2008

Some part of that increase was due to SNAP, some part of unemployment, some part to medicaid, social security, medicare, other benefits, etc

20% of the SNAP part was due to a temporary change in that program but you put that part up front. Misleading?

There have ALWAYS been "cracks". Republicans (and conservatives) know that, despite Grover's pledge, the eventual solution to fiscal stability will require both spending cuts and tax increases. There is really no other solution. And the longer a final compromise is postponed, the more will be needed of both cuts and revenues.

But tax increases should NOT be pursued before cuts are made. Too often the Dems have said, "OK, we'll make billions in cuts 4 years from now, if you agree to tax increases today." That has proven to be just another "Lucy and the football". The cuts never come.

So, before the Republicans agree to any revenue increases, there needs to be a number of "structural changes". This means a wider tax base (virtually everybody has to pay taxes, not just the 49% in the top). Second, the government must shrink....today (not four years from now); this means eliminating programs, agencies, and possibly departments. Third, there must be an "anti-spending increase governor" on the budgetary process. A permanent control designed to gradually reduce the growth of spending until a balanced budget is reached and we begin to pay down the debt.

Republicans would seize such a deal today, if the Dems offer one. But the Dems won't do it. They would have to give up too many programs that they promised to special interest groups. It would hurt them at the voting booth if they did that now. So.....we must wait till after the election before such a deal is really formulated and agreed to.

The Bush tax cuts did not create one NET job, in fact under Bush we were losing upwards of 800,000 jobs a month. If the GOP is so serious about fixing the debt then they should let the tax cuts expire.

Any bill that continues with this unsustainable revenue suck should be vetoed. Right now the wealthy are sitting back on their long term dividends and capital gains paying 15% in taxes. Why would they run out and create jobs when they have a great deal doing nothing.

If they had to pay more in taxes then maybe they would actually create jobs to make more money to sustain their lifestyle.

The Bush tax cuts did not create one NET job, in fact under Bush we were losing upwards of 800,000 jobs a month. If the GOP is so serious about fixing the debt then they should let the tax cuts expire

I agree let the tax cuts expire, since after all the Bush Tax cuts are the reason 50% of American Tax filers don't pay a dime of federal income tax. Prior to the Bush tax cuts less than 40% didnt pay anything.